Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Narratives / myths of how Nguyễn Văn Linh was a economic reformer in Vietnam's renovation interpreted by scholars.

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Narratives / myths of how Nguyễn Văn Linh was a economic reformer in Vietnam's renovation interpreted by scholars.


The other MFD did not post cleanly so here is the link to that article.

WP:NOTESSAY, submitted under two different lengthy names. See author's own statement: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Narratives_,_historiography_and_myths_of_how_Nguyễn_Văn_Linh_as_an_economic_reformer_in_Vietnam%27s_renovation_interpreted_by_scholars&oldid=869433627  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is an essay under two names, and so should not be accepted. I would consider keeping to give the author time to try to work it into something neutral point of view, but, first, the essays are too long, and, second, submitting the essay under two names (when they are really the same) is tendentious.  (Also, the two names are disruptively long for Wikipedia, although they might be right as subtitles to an M.A. thesis.)  Robert McClenon (talk) 19:58, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think that I have corrected the bundling. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Nguyễn Văn Linh. Disagree with the ESSAY allegation, it is merely WP:SYNTH violating. The author should start his Wikipedian career by improving that article, starting with small improvements, and engaging others on the talk page. Newcomers are very poorly advised to start by creating new pages. Improve existing content first, ensure you learn the ropes before embarking on the much more challenging task of creating a new topic.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would be useful to retain such a lengthy redirect but rather to tell the author to work on that article instead. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 04:16, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Do both. The content is not actually offensive so as to need deletion.  The newcomer may well follow their desktop browser memory to this title, and redirect “tells” them very nicely, as opposed to them finding the rejection of a deletion log, in addition of the very unkind mfd template on their userpage.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:00, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I would do that if I thought it was an earnest attempt at writing a Wikipedia article, but as it stands, it reads like someone's research paper / essay for a class that was copied over to Wikipedia. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 05:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, maybe copied from an outside use, but he has shown an interest in improving Wikipedia. That should not be rudely rebuffed, and deletion is a rude rebuff. There is no shame in stretching AGF as long as you are well should of a suicide pact. Regardless of deletion, the title and content are going to remain in the servers forever. There is no advantage to suppressing from non-admins. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:45, 19 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete, per RMC. The titles are not useful as redirects, and the content is way too much like an essay to be worth preserving for integration into the mainspace version. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 08:38, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirects are cheap, of course. I am not much opposed to “delete and redirect” or “delete with explicit log reference to Nguyễn Văn Linh“.  I think ideally the nominator should have simply redirected.  —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:08, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.